On Dec 11, 2014 11:13 AM, "Ilia Mirkin" wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 2:10 PM, Chris Forbes wrote:
> > Iago,
> >
> > This doesn't matter for GL conformance -- but the impression I get is
> > that dEQP is aiming at something more.
> >
> > In any case, the usual problem with this is inaccurate
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 2:10 PM, Chris Forbes wrote:
> Iago,
>
> This doesn't matter for GL conformance -- but the impression I get is
> that dEQP is aiming at something more.
>
> In any case, the usual problem with this is inaccurate range
> reduction, which is fixable in software at some perform
Iago,
This doesn't matter for GL conformance -- but the impression I get is
that dEQP is aiming at something more.
In any case, the usual problem with this is inaccurate range
reduction, which is fixable in software at some performance cost. The
C library does this, for example.
- Chris
On Thu,
On 12/11/2014 11:59 AM, Iago Toral wrote:
That said, I also noticed that most of the errors reported are for
fairly big numbers, so I played a bit with some examples and noticed
that trigonometric functions lose more precision as their argument gets
bigger. If I pass arguments of a few thousand r
Hi,
there are a bunch of dEQP tests that check precision of trigonometric
functions and float qualifiers that fail on i965. The way these tests
usually operate is that they define a float (with a lowp, mediump or
highp precision qualifier) and assign the result of a trigonometric
function to it. T